Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7081 to 7100 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The dominant issue was whether cash deposited by the company's directors and later transferred to the assessee's account for share purchase could be taxed as unexplained credit under s. 68. The Tribunal held that the authorities proceeded on mere suspicion by relying only on the directors' salary during the relevant year and routine expenses, without examining their prior savings or capital accumulation, and the first appellate authority upheld the addition without mandated inquiry, rendering the order arbitrary. It further held that, on these facts, the correct provision, if any, was s. 69A (unexplained money) and not s. 68, showing non-application of mind. The addition was deleted and the appeal was allowed - ITAT
The dominant issue was whether cash deposited by the company's directors and later transferred to the assessee's account for share purchase could be taxed as unexplained credit under s. 68. The Tribunal held that the authorities proceeded on mere suspicion by relying only on the directors' salary during the relevant year and routine expenses, without examining their prior savings or capital accumulation, and the first appellate authority upheld the addition without mandated inquiry, rendering the order arbitrary. It further held that, on these facts, the correct provision, if any, was s. 69A (unexplained money) and not s. 68, showing non-application of mind. The addition was deleted and the appeal was allowed - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.